linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/8][for -mm] mem_notify v6: memory_pressure

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20080213152204.D894.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:37:13 +0900
From:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, marcelo@...ck.org,
	daniel.spang@...il.com, riel@...hat.com, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, pavel@....cz, a1426z@...ab.com,
	jonathan@...masters.org, zlynx@....org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8][for -mm] mem_notify v6: memory_pressure_notify() caller

Hi Andrew

> > and, It is judged out of trouble at the fllowing situations.
> >  o memory pressure decrease and stop moves an anonymous page to the
> > inactive list.
> >  o free pages increase than (pages_high+lowmem_reserve)*2.
> 
> This seems rather arbitrary.  Why choose this stage in the page
> reclaimation process rather than some other stage?
> 
> If this feature is useful then I'd expect that some applications would want
> notification at different times, or at different levels of VM distress.  So
> this semi-randomly-chosen notification point just won't be strong enough in
> real-world use.

Hmmm
actually, This portion become code broat through some bug reports.

Yes, I think it again and implement it more simplefy.
Thanks!


> Does this change work correctly and appropriately for processes which are
> running in a cgroup memory controller?

nice point out.

to be honest, I don't think at mem-cgroup until now.
I will implement it at next post.

> Given the amount of code which these patches add, and the subsequent
> maintenance burden, and the unlikelihood of getting many applications to
> actually _use_ the interface, it is not obvious to me that inclusion in the
> kernel is justifiable, sorry.

OK.
I'll implement it again more simplefy.
Thanks.


> memory_pressure_notify() is far too large to be inlined.

OK.
I will fix it.

> Some of the patches were wordwrapped.

Agghh..
I will don't use gmail at next post.
sorry.


and,
I hope merge only poll_wait_exclusive() and wake_up_locked_nr()
if you don't mind.

this 2 portion anybody noclaim about 2 month.
and I think it is useful function by many people.



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/